From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C1C6B0025 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 20:13:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qyk30 with SMTP id 30so764816qyk.14 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 17:13:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1889981320.330808.1305081044822.JavaMail.root@zmail06.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:13:54 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: OOM Killer don't works at all if the system have >gigabytes memory (was Re: [PATCH] mm: check zone->all_unreclaimable in all_unreclaimable()) From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: CAI Qian , KOSAKI Motohiro , avagin@gmail.com, Andrey Vagin , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins , Oleg Nesterov On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:34 AM, David Rientjes wrote= : > On Tue, 10 May 2011, CAI Qian wrote: > >> Sure, I saw there were some discussion going on between you and David >> about your patches. Does it make more sense for me to test those after >> you have settled down technical arguments? >> > > Something like the following (untested) patch should fix the issue by > simply increasing the range of a task's badness from 0-1000 to 0-10000. > > There are other things to fix like the tasklist dump output and > documentation, but this shows how easy it is to increase the resolution o= f > the scoring. =C2=A0(This patch also includes a change to only give root It does make sense. I think raising resolution should be a easy way to fix the problem. > processes a 1% bonus for every 30% of memory they use as proposed > earlier.) I didn't follow earlier your suggestion. But it's not formal patch so I expect if you send formal patch to merge, you would write down the rationale. > > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ unsigned int oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, struc= t mem_cgroup *mem, > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 */ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0if (p->flags & PF_OOM_ORIGIN) { > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0task_unlock(p); > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 return 1000; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 return 10000; > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0} > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/* > @@ -177,32 +177,32 @@ unsigned int oom_badness(struct task_struct *p, str= uct mem_cgroup *mem, > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0points =3D get_mm_rss(p->mm) + p->mm->nr_ptes; > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0points +=3D get_mm_counter(p->mm, MM_SWAPENTS)= ; > > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points *=3D 1000; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points *=3D 10000; > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0points /=3D totalpages; > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0task_unlock(p); > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/* > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Root processes get 3% bonus, just like the= __vm_enough_memory() > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* implementation used by LSMs. > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Root processes get 1% bonus per 30% memory= used for a total of 3% > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* possible just like LSMs. > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 */ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0if (has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points -=3D 30; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points -=3D 100 * (poi= nts / 3000); > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/* > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * /proc/pid/oom_score_adj ranges from -1000 t= o +1000 such that it may > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * either completely disable oom killing or al= ways prefer a certain > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * task. > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 */ > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points +=3D p->signal->oom_score_adj; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 points +=3D p->signal->oom_score_adj * 10; > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0/* > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * Never return 0 for an eligible task that ma= y be killed since it's > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* possible that no single user task uses mor= e than 0.1% of memory and > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* possible that no single user task uses mor= e than 0.01% of memory and > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * no single admin tasks uses more than 3.0%. > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 */ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0if (points <=3D 0) > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0return 1; > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 return (points < 1000) ? points : 1000; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 return (points < 10000) ? points : 10000; > =C2=A0} > > =C2=A0/* > @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigne= d int *ppoints, > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 */ > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0if (p =3D=3D current) { > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0chosen =3D p; > - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 *ppoints =3D 1000; > + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 *ppoints =3D 10000; Scattering constant value isn't good. You are proving it now. I think you did it since this is not a formal patch. I expect you will define new value (ex, OOM_INTERNAL_MAX_SCORE or whatever) --=20 Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org